If we want to reduce alcoholism, this is a good idea. I spoke to Dr Richard Bowskill, the medical director at the Priory Hospital, which specialises in addiction. "Alcohol is an addictive drug, and exposing people to a higher dose of that drug will lead to more people developing alcohol problems," says Dr Bowskill. A reduction in the strength of drinks would see people drink less alcohol, and therefore fewer cases of alcohol addiction.

He also points out that, if the price of each drink remains the same, the move would amount to "a de facto price rise" on alcohol. "From a public health perspective, there is evidence that the price per unit of alcohol dictates drinking levels. So cheaper alcohol leads to more drinking. If you lowered the ABV but kept the price the same, and the quality and taste, then that might work," he says. It's a politically intelligent move, as well: "It avoids an announcement that taxes will be raised on alcohol, which in the current climate would be unpopular," says Dr Bowskill.

There is a limit to how far you can push the price of alcohol up before it becomes counterproductive. "In Norway and Sweden, prices have shot up – and an epidemic of home-brewing has arisen, with people getting drunk at home," he says. But the likelihood is that if done correctly, it will have some, probably strong, effect on drinking habits. A 2009 meta-analysis found that raising the price of alcohol has a large effect on consumption compared to other policies. "Public policies that raise prices of alcohol are an effective means to reduce drinking," it concludes.

The trouble is, of course, that raising the price of alcohol has other effects as well. Obviously by some measures things would be better if Britain slowed its boozing – the NHS would have fewer drunks to stitch up at weekends, and our life expectancies would improve. But for every problem drinker's liver saved from cirrhosis, there will be a number of social drinkers who can't afford a second beer at the weekend.

That said, every freedom comes at a cost to other freedoms. One person's freedom to drink to excess in Britain's town centres limits limits another's freedom to walk through Cornmarket Street without getting heckled by drunken students; one person's freedom to buy 8.5 per cent cider at £1.09 for 550ml limits another's freedom to find a bus stop that hasn't been used as an al fresco urinal. Which freedom is more important is a matter for politicians, but if we decide we want a less boozy Britain, Ann Milton's proposals are a sensible way to go.